SynthesisBMC oral health2024
Efficacy and safety of thalidomide for recurrent aphthous stomatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in BMC oral health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in the treatment of recurrent aphthous stomatitis: from synthetic and natural drugs to novel drug delivery systems.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Renaissance of Phoenix Drug Thalidomide-New Insights into Practical Clinical Application and Optimization Strategies for Managing Adverse Effects in Digestive Diseases.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecurrent aphthous stomatitis (RAS) is considered as the most common oral mucosal lesion affecting up to 25% of people worldwide. Thalidomide has been reported for the treatment of RAS, but the evidence has not been systematically evaluated. We first systematically reviewed the efficacy and safety of thalidomide for the treatment of RAS.
methodsWe searched The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (CBM), Wanfang Data, and VIP information from inception to December 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing thalidomide with control for RAS were included in the analysis. The primary outcome were complete response and overall response, and the secondary outcome were recurrence interval (RI), ulcer number and size, healing time, visual analogue scale (VAS), immunological data, and adverse events. Meta-analysis was conducted using the Review Manager 5.4 software.
resultsTwenty-one trials involving 1668 patients were included in this review. The results of our meta-analysis showed that thalidomide significantly improved the complete response rate and overall response rate, prolonged the recurrence interval, accelerated the healing process, reduced the number and size of ulcers, and lowered TNF-α levels in the treatment of RAS. However, thalidomide significantly increases adverse events.
resultsThalidomide has a significant benefit in the treatment of RAS. However, considering the potential side effects of thalidomide, it may be an optimal treatment option for major RAS patients or cases that do not respond to topical agents.
trial registrationPROSPERO registration number: CRD42024495038.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.